[busterarm]

IQ tests are not and have never been intended to measure intelligence. They're intended to be a measure of potential.

The fact that those articles got it wrong from the basic definitions should indicate there is a problem with the interpretation. If you look at the actual first study link, for example, it doesn't debunk IQ but highlights logistical problems of pen & paper testing and sample size. What they then do is present an alternative measurement based on brain scans. They also do this intentionally to avoid controversial questions of heritability, race and gender that people associate with IQ measurement, as laid out by their introduction.

[jraph]

I assume you are referring to:

> The results question the validity of controversial studies of intelligence based on IQ tests which have drawn links between intellectual ability race, gender and social class and led to highly contentious claims that some groups of people are inherently less intelligent that other groups.

I read this as "These studies measuring intelligence using IQ which have drawn links between intellectual ability, race, gender and social class are shit and we prove it".

This is at the opposite of what you are writing. It's not at all avoiding controversies. It's debunking, basically.

You are being downvoted and flagged elsewhere because you are wrong, not because one can't describe "controversial" truth.